<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Tax dispute settled under Vivad se Vishwas Act despite minor delay in payment.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=83658</link>
    <description>The High Court quashed the order rejecting the issuance of Form 5 under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 (DTVSV Act) and directed the respondent to issue Form 5 to the petitioner within twelve weeks. The petitioner had paid the entire amount except Rs. 1,533/- within the specified time period on or before 30th September, 2021. The delay of twelve days in payment of Rs. 1,533/- was considered unintentional and supported by a justifiable reason. The petitioner had also paid the difference of the amount payable after 30th September, 2021. The Court held that permitting the petitioner the benefit of the Scheme would not amount to extending or modifying the Scheme, which is the prerogative of the Government.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 04 Dec 2024 08:44:22 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Dec 2024 08:44:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=780702" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Tax dispute settled under Vivad se Vishwas Act despite minor delay in payment.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=83658</link>
      <description>The High Court quashed the order rejecting the issuance of Form 5 under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 (DTVSV Act) and directed the respondent to issue Form 5 to the petitioner within twelve weeks. The petitioner had paid the entire amount except Rs. 1,533/- within the specified time period on or before 30th September, 2021. The delay of twelve days in payment of Rs. 1,533/- was considered unintentional and supported by a justifiable reason. The petitioner had also paid the difference of the amount payable after 30th September, 2021. The Court held that permitting the petitioner the benefit of the Scheme would not amount to extending or modifying the Scheme, which is the prerogative of the Government.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 Dec 2024 08:44:22 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=83658</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>